What a dumb article, among the difference between the US and France:
1. France enforces immigration law and these people came as legal residence and France let them stay permanently. That is the opposite of the US situation where we need to beef up our border security including probably having a guest worker program.
2. The immigrants in the case of the US share the same broad religion as the US again the opposite of the French situation.
3. France has not history of integrating immigrants, the US has a long history of integrating immigrants.
There will be no attritition so long as we keep hiring them. Less Mexicans come in when the economy is slow.
Fernando Ortiz was a ‘landscape engineer’ on Long Island who had demanded to be able to vote, on the basis that he had been paying state and federal taxes for ten years. Actually, he had been stopped from casting a ballot by a poll watcher who had suspected his citizenship status, and (illegally, as it turned out) demanded proof of his identity and legal qualification to vote. Ortiz had won a multi-million dollar settlement against the Republican Party of New York in the subsequent “racial profiling and ethnic intimidation” civil suit, but he did not stop there.
Instead, with massive support from the ACLU and various Hispanic “immigrants rights” foundations, he had pressed his demand to be allowed to vote all the way to the Supreme Court…and he won. The Supreme Court, in its famous 5-4 decision, ruled that negligence in securing America’s borders against illegal immigration on the part of the federal government, could not be held against “undocumented workers who played by the rules and paid their taxes,” once they were established in America—legally or not. The federal government had not taken reasonable efforts to secure the border, and had not pursued "undocumented workers" in the USA. Instead, it openly permitted them most of the benefits of citizenship, and it collected their taxes. "No taxation without representation!" was the cry heard all the way to the Supreme Court. The State of New York had then sleep-walked through an aimless and desultory case for denying the vote—and citizenship—to “undocumented workers.”
Following Ortiz v. New York, a stunned America woke up to discover that there were not only an amazing twenty-two million illegal aliens hiding in plain sight across the land, but that eight million of them immediately qualified to vote. In a nation split 50-50 down party and ideological lines, these eight million new voters were recognized to be the certain majority-makers in future elections, and both parties set record lows for cravenness in pandering to their “needs.” Chief among their “needs” were liberal new family reunification laws, and these instant citizens—illegal aliens only a year before—began bringing the remainders of their families to the USA. Legally.
Overnight, wavering Democrat states became locks, and swing states with large Hispanic populations went solidly “blue.” The result was the recent election which had brought Gobernador Deleon to power in Nuevo Mexico, and had also brought radical Democrats to power in the White House and both houses of congress.
Thus had come the political tsunami which swept all before it, a tidal wave triggered by an undocumented lawn maintenance worker named Fernando Ortiz.
ping
Blah, blah, blah, a really cheap attempt to compare Latin American Christians, to the muslim jihadis, France is dealing with fire hoses.
But even larger numbers of them haven't. And if they are politically passive, why are the Dems and the GOP letting them break all sorts of laws and give them all sorts of freebies in order to get them into the tent?
Really, it is quite simple.
Mexicans and other Latinos pour into the United States because there are jobs for them that pay much better than anything they can do at home.
They are able to do it because the US does not enforce immigration policy or labor law.
The US doesn't do that for a variety of reasons.
On the Left, the Democrats understand that the Hispanics are their political salvation. All of their other core constituencies are dwindling demographically, but the Hispanic population is surging. The article suggests that there are 11 million Mexicans in America. This is low. There are probably 20 million illegals in America, and the number grows both through continued immigration and natural increase. Those born here are Americans. They are poor because their parents were marginal. Poor people overwhelmingly vote Democrat.
Now, religiously, most Mexicans and other Latinos are pro-life. But these higher social concerns take a backseat to economic matters, and always will. The Democrats will always get the majority of the Hispanic vote, for as long as Hispanics are poor. Immigrants will be poor.
Many illegals vote. Democrat political machine in Democrat controlled areas get the illegals out to vote. The thrust of amnesty, which Democrats support and will instate whenever they can, is to massively increase the Democratic voter base.
Republicans are doing nothing to STOP this.
Nor, apparently, do they even acknowledge the political threat. For some mysterious reason Republicans think that the laws of economics won't apply to Hispanics, and that poor Hispanics won't vote their pocketbooks, which is to say, vote for Democrat social programs.
The only rational Republican stance would be to close and police the border, and heavily police the interior, deporting all illegals.
But the Republicans don't see it that way.
Of course Mexicans living here, and naturalized here, retain their Mexican citizenship. This will cut one of two ways in the future.